For those hording toilet paper

The film, The Last Broadcast, also offers a video editor who was asked by the prosecution against Jim Seurd, named Clair DeForest (Mark Rublee). This is a really rather disturbing (to me) example of using specifically selected footage to implicate someone through manipulative means.

Locus on discovered footage

Rein on discovered footage

I think that is another example of what makes this film so effective. It shows you how footage can be used against someone. But as David Leigh, the documentarian and narrative voice of this film (David Beard) slowly unravels, footage can also unveil, bit by bit, potential innocence for someone implicated when certain parts are spliced together for a conviction.

Found footage has evolved over the years in a way that has decided to not follow so specifically to the rules (footage that exists which provides reasoning behind what might have happened to people unaware of the danger that truly emerges; many don't take seriously the dangers that could exist; the threat gradually envelopes those on the footage). You get where you accept that what you see is not just footage found under a log or in a delivered box at your front door by a supposed unknown party.

Cannibal Holocaust led the way to what you could do, and the next generation of found footage took its concept, pointing the way to what exists today. The Blair Witch Project set the world on fire, and perhaps CH gained further exposure and interest as horror fans clamored for anything remotely similar to the format of found footage.

With the likes of Jim Seurd's child psychologist (Dale Worstall), a web page designer (Jay MacDonald) who is asked about IRC (Internet Relay Chat) and how to find out who asked about Fact or Fiction's studying the Pine Barrens for the Jersey Devil (a significant plot point; this could very well be the killer, getting the hosts in the woods to slay them) while also offering comments on information regarding what IRC really is, a data retrieval expert (Michele Pulaski, whose death scene took a while to perfect) who could be unmasking a killer as she uses a computer program to clear up very damaged video tape, and, of course, David, there is a lot of contemplation and offered explanation of events that led to and occurred during that fateful trip to the Pine Barrens.

Shelley’s work slowly gives voices to the dead, ghosts caught on video.

 

Sections of the tape Michele tries to fix with her computer

Locus sees his killer behind Rein (with camera recording)

What Michele has to work with.

I think students of found footage owe it to themselves to seek this out as an early example of the bloated subgenre that is really only rivaled by the zombie genre today. I especially enjoyed the footage that emerges. You have what existed already, and how it was the property accumulated so that the authorities and law could build a case and conviction for a wrongfully accused man, and then a second tape that was mentioned by Locus right before he removes it from the camera. What is cool is how this footage is just mentioned, and then it turns up coincidentally at David's doorstep. It is one of those points in a film that keeps your interest from heading for the exit. It compels and says to us, "What could be on this unraveled tape? Possible evidence of the real killer?" I think seeing Locus and Rein together as Stephen vanishes once he leaves their tent to check out the surrounding area in the emerging footage further develops their personalities; they are just goofy young men who are growing tired of the nonsense of their boss' idea in these infernally cold woods. Showing the footage buried under white noise and engulfed in crippling damage lines, with Michele's work surfacing what lies underneath is one of my favorite moments.

I think it is a winner. But don't take my word for it...see what you think?

The principles: